Isn’t it strange that simply because bones might have been found somewhere, that place is assumed to have been the intended final resting place?

I think a lot can be made from this. Look at Long Barrows, for example. Many bones were found inside the chambers at West Kennet – mostly human plus a few animal ones.  The bones were in quite a mess, it wasn’t a simple task to reassemble them. We’ve read that many smaller bones were missing from the barrows; it seems there was a preference for larger bones (legs and skulls). These were not simple burials.

Bones from these times were also found in the contemporary ditches at Windmill Hill, the ‘ceremonial’ centre at the time. It’s been suggested they were taken from the barrow and deposited during feasts.

The more significant the bone, the greater the ancestors power. Charge them up in a barrow-battery and stand back! Things changed and the inheritors found the need to fill up the barrows (blocking the forces within?) From bottom to top they pack it in, bones and all. And this is how it was found, in it’s final state.

The need for burial as we understand it has come later, the Bronze Age. Is it due to this that we haven’t come across many Neolithic burials?

(Fred, it was Thomas and Knight who worked on Uriels Machine. If you’ve had trouble with this, try Civilization One [2004] also by Knight and with Butler. It too deals with Thom's Megalithic Yard, but is much easier to follow and taked the implications further!)